GV Camouflage

[danny76]

I have had a notion after reading another thread.

With regards to people asking for no GV icons because in RL, GV's would be covered in cam nets and difficult or impossible to see from the air.

This gave me the idea. I have in an Armoured unit since 1993, when we cam up vehicles, whether it be MBT's or Command Post vehicles, it takes a certain amount of time, probably 30 mins + to properly camouflage a vehicle with IR sheeting and Cam Netting. When done properly it involves the use of extendable poles and cages in order to break up the outline of the vehicle and to blend it with the surroundings.

I suggest that a similar concept is used for GV's in game.

If you want to have no icon, you would drive your vehicle to a hull down position, select an option to camouflage it, this would have a time penalty, say 45 seconds or whatever to replicate the time it would take to cam the vehicle correctly in RL.

At that point the vehicles icon would disappear and although it could still be seen you would not have a large red neon sign advertising trade to those that shall remain nameless, who enjoy killing GV's.

Whilst camouflaged the fields of fire would be reduced, as they would in reality by being under cam netting, the player could then choose to de-cam and move, again with a time penalty, and move to a new location to re cam again, or alternatively could simply drive out of the position if the situation warranted, as you would in real life, destroying the cam netting and preventing its re-use that sortie.

[gyrene81]

been suggested before, just not in that exact manner. would be an interesting twist to the ground pounders.

[guncrasher]

why not just let us buy cammo netting using gold?  then after 3 seconds you disappear 20 meters from the enemy like in wot?

also if you get rid of gv icons, it's only fair to get rid of plane icons too.  nothing more frustrating than following a low plane only to be shot down by a werbie with no icon in the current model.


semp

[Tilt]

I like it always did.

Would be nice to get rid of spawn camping first.

[danny76]

why not just let us buy cammo netting using gold?  then after 3 seconds you disappear 20 meters from the enemy like in wot?

also if you get rid of gv icons, it's only fair to get rid of plane icons too.  nothing more frustrating than following a low plane only to be shot down by a werbie with no icon in the current model.


semp

Never played wot, have played Royal Armoured Corps in UK, Germany, Ireland and Afghanistan though and figured it would be a reasonable suggestion

[Tank-Ace]

why not just let us buy cammo netting using gold?  then after 3 seconds you disappear 20 meters from the enemy like in wot?

also if you get rid of gv icons, it's only fair to get rid of plane icons too.  nothing more frustrating than following a low plane only to be shot down by a werbie with no icon in the current model.


semp

No it is not. Unlike the pilot of a fighter-bomber, the a tank commander has an approximately fixed point of view, a much lighter work load, and the ability to use binoculars. The fighter pilot is also doing 300+ in most cases, and in your example, focusing on an enemy aircraft. A GV is also at least painted in a color that is somewhat inconspicuous (either olive-drab, dun, or camouflaged), and usually in among the trees, not barreling across an open field at top speed.



The fact is that if you get surprised by a wirb, you failed in SA. It includes more than just whats on your six, and whats on your 12. It encompass that, and all of the environment you will be fighting over. Location of CV, its distance to coast, position of friendly aircraft, location of town and base, enemy GV spawns, friendly GV spawns, likely routes of travel for GV's both friendly and enemy, likely direction for enemy planes to arrive from, likely direction from friendly planes to arrive from, and a lot more.

Simply put, SA is not being aware of your situation, but being aware of your environment. More than that, its being consciously aware of your environment, and actively using that information to affect your decisions.


Now I don't know about you dunces, but I've never failed to notice when an enemy aircraft is extending towards either a known enemy position, or a likely enemy position. I'm also able to judge how long it will take to reach that position, and how fast I can shoot the guy down. I can usually tell if he's trying to drag me to flack, or to a group of his buddies. And in either case, I can tell when its time to break off and reset.


So no, I don't buy that BS of "well, I can't see the enemy flacks in time". So what if you can't see the things directly, you damn well know they're there, and are a bloody liar if you claim any different. The enemy isn't being clever. They're not being sneaky, or tricky, or doing anything but following a pattern that's as old as the Ostwind. If your IQ isn't high enough to remember that pattern, and recognize it when you see it, a change in icons won't keep you alive much longer.


Best comparison I can make with you lot is that you're like a bull in the ring. Stupid, and so focused on that red cape that you don't see the waiting sword.

[guncrasher]

Never played wot, have played Royal Armoured Corps in UK, Germany, Ireland and Afghanistan though and figured it would be a reasonable suggestion

reasonable it is.  but to be honest we are just playing a game here.  tanks under trees with engines off can only be seen from like 700 feet.   which in fact makes them camouflaged. and if you really know how to use the trees, houses, etc, you are really very well camouflaged already and hard as hell to see.

in fact the current system works so well that we cant see you unless you fire.  the more you fire the better it is for planes to follow you.

so I say, if you want your icon to disappear then make it a trade off.  planes can see you from 6k like before until you spend 45 seconds to get your cammo on.


semp

[ReVo]

No it is not. Unlike the pilot of a fighter-bomber, the a tank commander has an approximately fixed point of view, a much lighter work load, and the ability to use binoculars.

The fighter pilot is also doing 300+ in most cases, and in your example, focusing on an enemy aircraft.

A GV is also at least painted in a color that is somewhat inconspicuous (either olive-drab, dun, or camouflaged), and usually in among the trees, not barreling across an open field at top speed.



The fact is that if you get surprised by a wirb, you failed in SA. It includes more than just whats on your six, and whats on your 12. It encompass that, and all of the environment you will be fighting over. Location of CV, its distance to coast, position of friendly aircraft, location of town and base, enemy GV spawns, friendly GV spawns, likely routes of travel for GV's both friendly and enemy, likely direction for enemy planes to arrive from, likely direction from friendly planes to arrive from.


Now I don't know about you dunces, but I've never failed to notice when an enemy aircraft is extending towards either a known enemy position, or a likely enemy position. I'm also able to judge how long it will take to reach that position, and how fast I can shoot the guy down. I can usually tell if he's trying to drag me to flack, or to a group of his buddies. And in either case, I can tell when its time to break off and reset.




So no, I don't buy that BS of "well, I can't see the enemy flacks in time". So what if you can't see the things directly, you damn well know they're there, and are a bloody liar if you claim any different. The enemy isn't being clever. They're not being sneaky, or tricky, or doing anything but following a pattern that's as old as the Ostwind. If your IQ isn't high enough to remember that pattern, and recognize it when you see it, a change in icons won't keep you alive much longer.

Good old Jager, always trying to throw insults around to keep the status quo of broken mechanics intact.

[Tank-Ace]

Its simple fact. If you honest to god did not notice the enemy was dragging you towards the spawn or the town-spawn line (95% of all enemy wirbles are located here), then there's only three possible explanations.

1) you're dumb, and simply didn't recognize the patterns
2) you failed in the SA department
3) you were target fixated, which is a way of saying you were being dumb.


There's simply no way that an intelligent  player who has good general-area SA and is actively aware of and making decisions about his position will be "surprised" by an enemy wirblewind on so regular a basis that it generates this level of complaining.

[guncrasher]

Its simple fact. If you honest to god did not notice the enemy was dragging you towards the spawn or the town-spawn line (95% of all enemy wirbles are located here), then there's only three possible explanations.

1) you're dumb, and simply didn't recognize the patterns
2) you failed in the SA department
3) you were target fixated, which is a way of saying you were being dumb.


There's simply no way that an intelligent  player who has good general-area SA and is actively aware of and making decisions about his position will be "surprised" by an enemy wirblewind on so regular a basis that it generates this level of complaining.

I can come up with more explanations for you breaking off a chase.

1.  plane is heading to spawn because there's always werbies there.
2.  because enemy is heading somewhere between spawn and town, because there's always werbies there.
3.  because anemy is heading somewhere between spawn and base, because there's always werbies there.
4.  enemy is heading back to base because there's always werbies there.

an intelligent person like you always breaks off combat because "there might be" some werbies there. 

on the other hand an intelligent person would realize that I was just making a trade off to the op.  after all he doesnt get bombed every single time he ups a tank, does he?  just like I dont get shot down every time I fly over a spawn, because normally there isnt a werbie around.

on the other hand I dont break off combat just because there might be something there, do you?




semp

[Tank-Ace]

No, that's why I make an assessment of the risk, based on my SA.


Whenever the situation allows, I will always make a loop around the area to check things out. About 3000ft up is ideal, since wirbs often fire at you, but are still unlikely to hit you. In addition to that, I listen to the radio chatter, I watch where friendlies are avoiding, I watch where they die. I judge based on information how likely flackers are.

Town is white flagged? Probably AA vehicles either in, near, or en-route to town to protect troops. Extra caution is reasonable. GV's in town? Lone panzer; AA unlikely, minimal risk posed. Dual spawns? Possible GV fight in progress, higher chance of AA vehicles, avoid when possible. Friendlies flying Il-2's, A20's, and Tu-2's? Indicates enemy GV's moving at spawn, town, and/or in between; flackers probable, stay clear of area when low. CV attacking base? LVT most likely method of troop delivery, PT boats limited threat in coastal areas; risk minimal. Enemy VH down? Flacks can be considered as an approximate non-factor; watch VH status and continue as normal.

Aggressiveness is a virtue for a fighter pilot; blind aggressiveness is not, and is all too often what is being practiced in the MA. Its also the lead contributing factor for deaths to wirblewinds.


Now as to the trade-off thing, that's fine up to the point where it makes needless sacrifices to both realism and gameplay to quiet the howls of ignorance. The plain and simple truth is that an icon for planes is much more realistic than an icon for vehicles. Now if we could have real-life levels of detail represented in the screen, and binoculars for GV's, that would be much more acceptable to remove the icons. However, we don't have that, and removing the icon would still not save you from flack-draggers, since flackers don't simply aim for the icon anyway.

[guncrasher]

No, that's why I make an assessment of the risk, based on my SA.


Whenever the situation allows, I will always make a loop around the area to check things out. About 3000ft up is ideal, since wirbs often fire at you, but are still unlikely to hit you. In addition to that, I listen to the radio chatter, I watch where friendlies are avoiding, I watch where they die. I judge based on information how likely flackers are.

let me see if I understand what you are saying.  you are chasing a guy, then you loop the area around to check things out, climb to 3k feet since werbies fire at you.  then you continue the chase, give up?  what if there's no friends around to give you a warning?  oh hold on, you can loop, climb to 3k look to see if werbies fire at you then continue chase.


semp

[Ack-Ack]

I have had a notion after reading another thread.

With regards to people asking for no GV icons because in RL, GV's would be covered in cam nets and difficult or impossible to see from the air.

This gave me the idea. I have in an Armoured unit since 1993, when we cam up vehicles, whether it be MBT's or Command Post vehicles, it takes a certain amount of time, probably 30 mins + to properly camouflage a vehicle with IR sheeting and Cam Netting. When done properly it involves the use of extendable poles and cages in order to break up the outline of the vehicle and to blend it with the surroundings.

I suggest that a similar concept is used for GV's in game.

If you want to have no icon, you would drive your vehicle to a hull down position, select an option to camouflage it, this would have a time penalty, say 45 seconds or whatever to replicate the time it would take to cam the vehicle correctly in RL.

At that point the vehicles icon would disappear and although it could still be seen you would not have a large red neon sign advertising trade to those that shall remain nameless, who enjoy killing GV's.

Whilst camouflaged the fields of fire would be reduced, as they would in reality by being under cam netting, the player could then choose to de-cam and move, again with a time penalty, and move to a new location to re cam again, or alternatively could simply drive out of the position if the situation warranted, as you would in real life, destroying the cam netting and preventing its re-use that sortie.

I'd give it a 30 second timer and also a small perk cost if you want to take the camo.

ack-ack

[danny76]

I'd give it a 30 second timer and also a small perk cost if you want to take the camo.

ack-ack

I don't want to take it. I am a GV nightmare.

[Tank-Ace]

No. Before entering protracted combat, I do a quick check of the pertinent areas (though if I can get a quick snapshot, I'll obviously take it) prior to lowering my personally imposed floor of 3k. This typically consists of a two-leg flight path at 3k. Base-spawn and spawn-town, to check on flackers, enemy vehicles, as well as personally checking the status of town.

Obviously this is dynamic, as I will break that 3k floor if necessary to evade, but I try not to enter maneuvering combat or fly extended distances below 3k in a high-risk area I haven't yet checked.


Because it would be highly illogical, and rather ineffective for a wirblewind to stray very far from those two lines, I can reasonably assume that anywhere beyond the immediate surroundings are relatively safe. I can also assume the far side of my base, and the far side of town to be clear of flackers, as little benefit is gained from occupying those positions with a flack, and doing so is both difficult and time-consuming. Likewise, I can assume that the vast majority of any vehicles on the far side of their spawn are perk vehicles attempting to egress, which means that this area will be relatively safe, if not as safe as the areas behind my base or town.

Because of this, I will freely operate below 3k in these areas prior to checking, but will not cross the spawn below 3k, and I will not cross the spawn-town line unless I'm either 3k+, or literally flying below tree-top height prior to a check.



Now once I do that, I freely operate below 3k over the whole area. And if an enemy is trying to drag me to that line, or to the spawn, I make an assessment of the threat, and either pursue, or break off.